From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Dec 17 11:46:37 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA06735 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:46:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from misery.sdf.com (misery.sdf.com [204.244.210.193]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA06728 for ; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:46:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tom@sdf.com) Received: from tom by misery.sdf.com with smtp (Exim 1.73 #1) id 0xiPCD-0001nq-00; Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:31:53 -0800 Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 11:31:40 -0800 (PST) From: Tom To: Andrzej Bialecki cc: Karl Denninger , dennis , Greg Lehey , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ifconfig reports bogus netmask In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 17 Dec 1997, Andrzej Bialecki wrote: > And even if you don't want to run unnumbered interface, you waste only 4 > addresses (x.x.x.x/255.255.255.252), and even these can be private (e.g. > 10.x.x.x)... So I don't see that much waste here. Except that using private network numbers on p2p links has a number of bad affects, basically all certering around the fact that the router will use the private number as a source IP. > Andrzej Bialecki > > ---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- > abial@warman.org.pl | if(halt_per_mth > 0) { fetch("http://www.freebsd.org") } > Research & Academic | "Be open-minded, but don't let your brains to fall out." > Network in Poland | All of the above (and more) is just my personal opinion. > ---------------------+--------------------------------------------------------- > > > Tom